does the new macbook air with a M1 has a bootcamp?
MacBook
Virtualization engines that have been ported to the M1 will support Windows. This is not the same as native booting of Windows via Bootcamp.
WWDC showed Linux using Parallels on a Mini using an ARM/M1 processor.
MIstah_Broadway wrote:
LMAO WOOOOOOW !
Why even include bootcamp in M1 if we can't even use it ?!
Since you have a MacBook Air (M1, 2020), what do you see when you try to run Bootcamp Assistant?
Also, from Boot Camp - Official Apple Support,
The problem is the missing support of Windows gaming. I’ve loved combining the unsurpassed mac UX on productive stuff with gaming via bootcamp on Windows and Apple’s high-end desktops have been excellent in that regard, but will abandon Apple sadly if I can’t do this anymore in the future :(
Then I will no longer be purchasing Apple products. I'm a developer and the combination of Apple hardware with the ability to boot natively in Windows is the sole reason I purchased my Mac Pro Desktop (Yes, $4,000.00+). It allowed me to develop software for ANY platform. Parallels, as good as it is, is still painfully slow to develop with. I'm sure one of the main reasons sales sky rocketed in 2006 (when you switched to Intel) was exactly this reason.
You've made a huge mistake, basically taking a step backward to the days of the PowerPC and all the issues that came along with that.
You've now basically lost both the development and gaming population. I can run all my Steam games very nicely when I boot to Windows on my Mac Pro Desktop. Now I won't be able to do that as well.
No matter how fast this environment is, nobody will be developing games for it just like nobody develops games for it now. You'll only have the same, frankly lame games you currently have.
HUGE MISTAKE.
This advantage does not offset the loss to both developers being able to develop on ONE machine at hardware speeds vs the painfully slow speed of a VM. You've also lost gamers, since the game developing community will not switch to this now hobbled environment.
sievebrain wrote:
Then I will no longer be purchasing Apple products.
<snip>
HUGE MISTAKE.
You realize that Microsoft also has released ARM computers as well right? So I don't know what you are going to do.
Yes, and they also released Windows RT and who bought those? Who is buying the ARM versions of Microsoft's Surface? ?According to this article, it's not going so well.
Microsoft bet against Intel with its new Surfaces — and lost
So, now Apple is doing the same thing?
So, what would be my upgrade path? I can't keep using my Mac Pro Desktop, it's already incompatible with some of the software I use.
I can't buy a new Mac, unless I no longer want to do Windows development.
Therefore I'm back to having a Mac to do Mac development and a PC for doing Windows development.
It's a step backwards for me and an increase in hardware cost. Running a VM on the Mac is just too slow.
What would you suggest?
Windows NT (fathered by Dave Cutler) at one point supported Intel, MIPS, DEC Alpha, ARM, PowerPC, Itanium,... . Microsoft stuck to Intel and removed support for others in W2K.
The choice of ARM is partly driven by battery limitations. Intel has many issues with 5nm fabrication. Microsoft/Qualcomm use an ARM SQ2 design for Surface Pro X.
If Microsoft and Apple step away from Intel, and vendors like AMD and nVidia produce their own ARM SoCs, Intel will be in a tough place.
sailingbikeruk wrote:
Will they though?
Unless Intel can address it's fabrication issues, the pursuit of non-Intel CPUs/GPUs will continue.
There will always be room for non-Intel processors on devices. Mobile phones are a prime example of such use.
Virtualisation and Emulation are two different things. Running x86 architecture on an ARM processor requires some emulation as well as virtualisation.
It has been done before, and many times over. Apple chose to stay away from such on Rosetta2.
It's the same reason you cant run AIX/Unix type operating systems on Intel Processor based virtual platforms.
This is a bit confusing. macOS Big Sur is U*ix. Parallels/Fusion/VirtualBox support U*ix. WiNE emulates Windows. ESXi and Xen both allow U*ix. Can you clarify your statement?
I think you'll find this assumption is not correct and even if they do manage to emulate the command set it'll be resource intensive and potentially very slow.
Yes, this is partly true. Resource-Intensive - yes. Slow - perhaps, but it will be dependent on the specifics of the implementation. Computing hardware industry has waffled between CISC and RISC architectures for decades.
Unfortunately this does not resolve the issue for me. I need an actual windows environment for corporate needs. VPN, MFA, and God knows however other **** many security layers they keep pushing out on us seemingly monthly.
Just being able to run a Windows app is not the issue. Being able to work in the windows environment IS the issue.
Until I can replicate my corporate environment, i.e. Boot Camp or a VERY fast Parallels or fusion, I just can't trade in this map for a new one. And I can't afford the full cost without Trading in. It's $700 more that I just don't have.
The loss of Boot Camp is a huge kick in the weebles for me.
Incidentally, sievebrain, the Intel based «Mac Pro Desktop» isn’t going away any time soon (well, no sooner than a couple of years, at least).
The «Mac Pro Desktop» (and the iMac Pro) will, almost certainly, be the last to transition off the Intel platform.
So, you’ll have plenty of time to upgrade while staying on Intel, if that’s what you continue to need.
This also provides plenty of time for other developments!
GoldenDoggiesRule wrote:
Unfortunately this does not resolve the issue for me. I need an actual windows environment for corporate needs. VPN, MFA, and God knows however other **** many security layers they keep pushing out on us seemingly monthly.
Just being able to run a Windows app is not the issue. Being able to work in the windows environment IS the issue.
Until I can replicate my corporate environment, i.e. Boot Camp or a VERY fast Parallels or fusion, I just can't trade in this map for a new one. And I can't afford the full cost without Trading in. It's $700 more that I just don't have.
The loss of Boot Camp is a huge kick in the weebles for me.
It is not Apple's responsibility to provide you a Windows environment. If that is what you need then get yourself a Windows environment. Maybe the company will provide the proper tools you need to do your job if doing so yourself is not possible..
Loner T wrote:
WWDC showed Linux using Parallels on a Mini using an ARM/M1 processor.
...on page 1.
That is precisely the comment to which I was first responding.
This makes no mention of the nature of the Linux implementation, at all.
Yes, it was «on a Mini using an ARM… processor» (actually not the M1, but a predecessor [the chip from the iPad Pro, used in the Developer Preview Mac minis]), but leaves it ambiguous whether it was a “normal” Linux (as in one for Intel), or a Linux compiled for ARM.
So, I was simply clarifying that that particular demonstration was using an ARM implementation of Linux.
If I could I would I'm actually in the process of submitting a feedback form.
Hopefully we can see bootcamp as an app we can install and there wouldn't be many changes involved.
I feeeeeel you tho big dawg
I want to know too !!
bootcamp and M1
